Simulated P wave morphology in the presence of endo-epicardial activation delay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Evidences of asynchrony between epicardial and endocardial activation in the atrial wall have been reported. We used a computer model of the atria and torso to investigate the consequences of such activation delay on P wave morphology, while controlling for P wave duration. METHODS AND RESULTS: We created 390 models of the atria based on the same geometry. These models differed by atrial wall thickness (from 2 to 3 mm), transmural coupling, and tissue conductivity in the endocardial and epicardial layers. Among them, 18 were in baseline, 186 had slower conduction in the epicardium layer and 186 in the endocardial layer. Conduction properties were adjusted in such a way that total activation time was the same in all models. P waves on a 16-lead system were simulated during sinus rhythm. Activation maps were similar in all cases. Endo-epicardial delay varied between -5.5 and 5.5 ms vs. 0 ± 0.5 ms in baseline. All P waves had the same duration but variability in their morphology was observed. With slower epicardial conduction, P wave amplitude was reduced by an average of 20% on leads V3-V5 and P wave area decreased by 50% on leads V1-V2 and by 40% on lead V3. Reversed, lower magnitude effects were observed with slower endocardial conduction. CONCLUSION: An endo-epicardial delay of a few milliseconds is sufficient to significantly alter P wave morphology, even if the activation map remains the same.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".